Mmagnusson

I found it easier to play with bots to learn, they are more forgiving and are a bit bad at the game as well.

Cardgames.io/euchre/

But then again, startups probably aren't considering the geo-political implication of country TLDs and that in 5-10 years any specific nation might simply stop existing.

Hi. I work at a conpany that makes digital card games.

Start by making the rules work. We generally use a callback implementation. We have a class that handles the game and enforces rules and dictates flow, classes that represent players, and then a rendering class.

The game will call relevant functions to prompt the players for an action, passing the game state with them. The players respond with what they want to do. The game calls the renderer to draw it out, and the renderer will then call the passed callback action. Repeat until the game is over.

When a human is involved then you just hook actions to buttons and pieces and clickable elements that the game catches and responds to if needed.

Really you can use any principle or design paradigm you want, but since you are making a "simple" turn based game just having it simple and well segmented is an easy way to keep a handle on it.

But presumably you don't just stare at the wall. "Humans need something to do" is mainly bound to not just sitting around twiddling your thumbs. It's the reason we get bored, the brain is annoyed at not having anything to focus on.

It doesn't have to be literal work, just something you find engaging, be it going for a run, tending to houseplants, or completing your entire video game backlog.

And of course there is variation between humans. Some people cope well with having little to do, others always need to do something they find productive.

I'll be sad to see it go, but it has been a great run so I cannot complain

I mean, it isn't meaningless, just culturally subjective and lacking a rigerous definition. Berries are a set of specific fruit, which fruit being included being determined by the culture in question base on percieved similarities and historic uses. We use it to quickly bring up the specific group and whatever vague characteristics we percieve them to share.

So, the definition for berries that you seek is simply "the fruit people you're interested in would point at and identify as a berry", which is a vague definition and not rigerous at all, but most people would in fact think of the same thing you do if you say "I put berries on top of my cake". If I ask my wife "hey, on your way home swing by the store and buy some berries, any type will do", she will not bring a watermelon. She in fact will buy what we both agree are berries, and so the word has useful meaning.

You'll find most classifications humans have do this too. The real world is really good at refusing to fit into the neat boxes we made to classify it and the things in it, and yet we can still use them fine enough as long as we don't get lost in semantics and wondering if a hot dog is a sandwich or cereal soup.

Are grapes not considered berries in the anglosphere? In Icelandic they literally are named "Wine berries" and considered as such.

Sharks don't really pee. It gets stored it in their body tissue instead. Part of the preperation of shark is essentially pressing it for weeks to bring out the ammonia and let it break down into something that won't kill you. Doesn't taste good, but won't kill you.